| dteh on 12 Sep 2000 04:32:16 -0000 |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
| <nettime> draft article on WTO |
i must voice my hearty agreement with the views
expressed by m. robbins.
the current misguided attack on corporate globalisation
certainly seems to me to stem from a monumental mis-
characterisation of the 'corporation' itself. as you
say, there is certainly an overwhelming tendency
amongst (particularly, and most disturbingly, the
young) leftists to treat the face of corporate
capitalism like a Human Face, that should wince at
their many taunts, and that masks an ultimately human
conscience. this is the greatest failure, thus far, of
the recent movements against 'Globalisation and
Corporate Tyranny' - a thoughtless attribution of
humanity to instruments of capital that are not only
purely inhuman, but are obviously and explicitly so.
this unthinking anthropomorphic approach is
characterised by the common claim that it is "People
that are working for these corporations at the end of
the day". this is true but immaterial.
('people' also work for military organisations. many
go insane in the process, doing things they don't
necessarily 'believe in', but it's an objection that
can be subjugated to their need for
survival/pay/acceptance/identity/whatever.)
corporations will simply never behave like humans, in
the interests of humankind, or on the basis of human
values. from their very inception, they are created
with the specific goal of defying/manipulating these
values for profit.
people arguing against corporatisation do not seem to
understand the very nature of the corporate veil, which
is cast over every such company at its creation and
ensures, in practice and in law, that although the
company enjoys the peculiar advantage of legal person-
hood (explicitly distinct and separate from any other
(real) people's identities), it is furthermore granted
the latitude to pursue its rights as though it were a
person, at the expense of other 'persons', ALL without
the set of moral and 'human' obligations attendant upon
human beings at law.
many legal countermeasures, particularly in the modern
field of 'Equity' have set out to temper this weird
machinic/economic franchise; but it's not much use when
the constitutional foundations ensure its survival in
all key jurisdictions. this very imbalance is the core
of the domination of society by 'faceless' corporations
we seem intent on pinning faces to. a waste of time
and effort.
this personification problem also extends to group
identities; take a simple example. at recent anti-
corporatisation rallies here in Sydney, a crowd of
protestors marched on the CBD's towers of capitalist
inequality in order to disrupt the operations of some
of the BigBadCorporations. But the banner under which
they marched, which is really the residual
or 'catchment' platform of much of today's activism (at
least in the 'West') was 'Stop Corporate Tyranny'/'Anti-
GLobalisation'. In the best cases, this action
involved making a scene on the steps of some
skyscraper, and thus momentarily dragging the name and
logo of some BigBaddie through the teflon-based mud of
the Murdoch/Packer press.
but at worst, this was a poorly conceived general
complaint leveled at the oft-invoked "Captains of
Industry", as a group. To expose and embarrass a
corporation for its nefarious practices, even to the
short-memoried media-sphere, is one thing; to call for
the Death of all Corporations is another all together.
the problem with this, as i see it, is that
corporations simply don't ASSOCIATE. there is
no 'body' that winces when you scream for the death of
corporations. scream !down with the Evil North Ltd!
and North Ltd hurts momentarily. scream !down with
Evil Corporations! and nobody gives a shit. because
nobody's listening. insofar as these corporations do
identify AS corporations, they do not identify with
OTHER corporations, or with corporations GENERALLY.
that sort of group identity is what humans do, not
legal-economic instruments. and nor is the Business
Council of Australia, which does bring together most of
these BigBaddies, listening - simply because it
represents their interests as employers and traders,
not as politicians. what's more, it has a full-time
staff of LESS THAN FIVE actual people.
so the cries of this rally disappear like so much
nostalgic, down-with-the-system, pseudo-anarchistic
fluff into the background counter-cultural static -
this is merely an aesthetic appeal now, not a political
one. none of which is intended to discount the value
of symbolic protest; but it must be recognised that
this is all it is.
it is fundamentally important to understand now, (but
is almost never understood here), that the current
activist-m.o. is a pasty hangover of a 30 year-old
model of dissent than ultimately dissolved from staring
at its own reflection for too long. attempts to revive
the street-activism model of 1968 will fail as long as
the movements are united by targetting the ethereal
specter that is corporatisation/globalisation.
david teh
dteh@arthist.usyd.edu.au
-----------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through the ArtsIT web email interface.
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
# more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net